Historically, collecting and recording information about the condition of a physical object, such as a house or other building, vehicle, painting or other artwork, etc., has generally required inspectors with specialized knowledge and training, often using specialized tools, and typically resulting in the production of specialized reports. While there are many occasions when the inspection of, and recording of information about, an asset might be useful to increase knowledge about the asset, track its condition over time, or otherwise reduce some risk related to the asset, in many such cases the inspection is not done because of the effort and expense of getting the needed specialists involved, along with the required tools. Accordingly, such inspections and reports are often reserved for special events where the need for information or protection of the asset is great enough that the time and expense of undertaking an inspection is considered to be justified when compared to the risk involved in not doing an inspection. Further, the data collected, and the reports generated, are generally not standardized in any way.
While some assets are movable, in the case of a house or other building an inspection must be done by examining the asset where it is located, away from an office where any resulting report might be compiled. Even in the case of movable assets it may be desirable to inspect an asset where it is located rather than transporting the asset to an inspector's office, particularly where there is any risk created by moving the asset (e.g., rare cars, paintings, etc.).
Depending upon the type of asset and the objective of an inspection, the inspection may involve the collecting of many different pieces and types of data. For example, an inspection may involve identifying a location, taking notes, making sketches, dictating voice memos, marking up plans or documents, and/or taking photos or videos. Since many inspections are done where the asset is located, as above, inspectors have traditionally been required to carry all of the equipment that may be required to collect the various types of data related to the asset.
Further, while various mobile devices providing telephone and/or Internet access have become more common, there is no guarantee that an inspector will have access during the inspection to any information that is not either already known to the inspector or also carried in some fashion. If some information is required during the inspection that is not known or available to the inspector, a decision may have to be made whether to ignore the lack of the information, postpone the inspection, or at least a portion thereof, or abandon the inspection. Finally, because an inspection is generally a special, one-time (or rare) event, the time for the inspection process may be limited. There is thus usually pressure to ensure that all data is collected systematically and efficiently in a time-effective manner so that the allowed time is not exceeded.
After the on-site inspection process is complete, typically some processing of the collected data has to occur. This has traditionally been done later, often back at the inspector's office. For example, photos may have to be downloaded, printed and reviewed, transcripts of voice recordings prepared, handwritten notes assembled and all of the collected data correlated before any meaningful review, analysis or reporting can take place. Finally, after the on-site inspection and post-inspection processing, a report is typically prepared.
However, in some cases a significant period of time may have passed between the collection of field data and such post-inspection processing. Such instances can create problems in the preparation of a report. For example, memories may fade over time, and what was obvious when the inspection was being conducted may become obscure when trying to match photos with notes or floor layouts at a subsequent time. This is especially so if the data was collected months before such processing, or by a different person than the reviewer, perhaps even someone who has since left the organization.
In some cases, a database may be created to store the information that was collected and to define relationships between the various pieces of data. However, in such cases the data must first be entered into the database, which allows the possibility of input error and thus inaccurate data. Further, decisions still have to be made as to how to process the data into records, as well as what links should be made to tie the data together, which may lead to further input error. Such data entry and record and link creation is also often time consuming and inefficient.
Some attempts have been made to try to bring portable technology to the inspection process. For example, some database-driven applications have been made available on PDAs or other smart phones. Such solutions have generally been targeted at experienced and specialized inspectors who have acquired the knowledge needed to navigate through the various data-centric procedures involved in each application, which are often cumbersome and non-intuitive to one not trained in their use.
The existing solutions generally do not provide for conducting an inspection of an asset at a remote site using a mobile device that uses various functions of the mobile device to allow for the collection of all of the necessary data, instead of requiring multiple pieces of hardware. Further, none of the existing solutions provide a structured solution that allow for easy use by both seasoned specialist inspectors and inexperienced novice users alike, or for standardized data or reports.